Anyone who rejects Dr. Mantik's OD measurements on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays needs to explain how and why the measurements are wrong. OD measurement is an established science. Dr. Mantik made multiple sets of OD measurements on the skull x-rays in his several trips to the National Archives. He has published those measurements. Dr. Michael Chessar made his own OD measurements on the skull x-rays at the National Archives, and his findings confirm Dr. Mantik's.
When Dr. Fitzpatrick dismissed Dr. Mantik's OD research, he offered no explanation for the OD measurements, nor did he bother to do his own OD measurements. Fitzpatrick may not have known how to do OD measurements, but he is a forensic radiologist, so one would presume he knew how. Radiation oncologists use OD measurements frequently. Of course, Dr. Mantik is a radiation oncologist, and also a physicist.
Why is it that not a single WC apologist has arranged for an independent radiation oncologist or neuroscientist to do OD measurements on the skull x-rays? Why didn't Dr. Fitzpatrick do so when he had full access to the autopsy materials for the ARRB? Why haven't any WC apologists ventured to explain Dr. Mantik's and Dr. Chessar's OD measurements? I think we all know the answers to these questions, even if some of us won't say so publicly.
Dr. Fitzpatrick was obviously reluctant to conclude that the skull x-rays have been altered, and so he naturally could not accept Dr. Mantik's OD measurements and still believe the x-rays are unaltered.
Keep in mind that Pat Speer mistakenly based his whacky theory that the white patch was caused by the overlapping bone above the right ear on Dr. Fitzpatrick's analysis of the skull x-rays. Dr. Fitzpatrick noted the area of overlapping bone seen over the right ear in the lateral x-ray and in the autopsy photos, but he did not claim that this area was the white patch.
Speer's theory is ridiculous. Not only is the overlapping bone area not thick enough to be the white patch, but it is clearly above and forward of the area covered by the white patch. Anyone can look at the autopsy photos and see that the flap of overlapping bone is above the right ear, but the white patch on the skull x-rays is undeniably behind the right ear and below the flap. Indeed, part of the white patch extends into the parietal region. This isn't even a close call.
Here is Dr. Mantik's reply to Speer's criticisms:
http://www.themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdfThe Sibert and O'Neill report was not among the ARRB-released materials. However, the information that Sibert and O'Neill revealed in their ARRB depositions was new, and it agreed with what several of the ARRB-released HSCA medical interviews revealed, especially O'Neill's disclosure that at the end of the autopsy, there was no doubt in anyone's mind that the bullet that was found in Dallas had fallen out of the back wound. In fact, let's quote part of what O'Neill said about this:
There was not the slightest doubt when we left there that the bullet found on the stretcher in Dallas was the bullet which worked its way out through external cardiac massage. And the doctor said, since the body had not been turned over in Dallas, “External cardiac massage was conducted on the president, and the bullet worked its way out."
There was not the slightest doubt, not a scintilla of doubt whatsoever that this is what occurred. In fact, during the latter part of it and when the examination was completed, the doctor says, "Well, that explains it.” Because Jim [Sibert] had gone out, called the laboratory, learned about the bullet, came back in.
Because I was closer to the President’s body than I am to you, and you’re only about a foot and a half away or two feet away. And viewing them with the surgical probe and with their fingers, there was absolutely no point of exit and they couldn’t go any further. And that presented a problem, one heck of a problem. And that’s why Jim went out and called. . . .
Q: You previously made reference to attempts to probe that wound. Did you ever see any kind of metal object used to probe that wound?
A: Yes. They used a metal probe, in addition to their fingers. . . . In the back, they probed it to a point where they could not probe any further. In other words, it did not go any further.
Sibert told the ARRB the same thing. Sibert said he called Killion to see if any bullets had been found because the autopsy doctors said the back wound had no exit point:
Q: Can you tell me, was the phone call made to Mr. Killion before or after the body was unloaded from the casket?
A: Oh, that was after the body was removed; it was on the autopsy table, and the autopsy was in progress. Because the reason I made that call was that the pathologists said, "There’s no exit to this back wound,” and probed it with rubber glove and a chrome probe.
Sibert confirmed that Dr. Finck also probed the back wound:
Q: Okay. Do you recall whether Dr. Finck took any notes?
A: I don’t recall. I do recall he helped probe the back wound.
Sibert explained more about the probing and the fact that the autopsy doctors--"Finck, in particular"--said they could feel the end of the back wound:
But when they raised him up, then they found this back wound. And that’s when they started probing with the rubber glove and the finger, and and also with the chrome probe.
And that’s just before, of course, I made this call, because they were at a loss to explain what had happened to this bullet. They couldn’t find any bullet.
And they said, "There's no exit.” Finck, in particular, said, "There's no exit.” And they said that you could feel it with the end of the finger. I mean, the depth of this wound.
John Stringer, the autopsy photographer, told the ARRB that the back wound was probed and that the probe did not come out of the neck:
Q: Was the probe put into the neck, or did it come of the neck?
A: It was put into the back part.
Q: The back of the body. And then did the probe come out the neck?
A: No.
When the ARRB released the HSCA medical interviews and the transcripts of the ARRB's own medical interviews, WC apologists seemed to show little or no interest in them, whereas WC skeptics studied them carefully and found numerous crucial disclosures. WC apologists have lamely dismissed these accounts as "mistaken," "faulty memories," etc., even though the witnesses gave their accounts independently and with no knowledge of what other witnesses had said, and even though those witnesses who were also interviewed by the ARRB confirmed their HSCA accounts.
You can bet that if numerous autopsy witnesses had independently given mutually corroborating accounts that said the probing of the back wound determined that the exit point was the throat, and if all of those witnesses who were also interviewed by the ARRB confirmed their earlier accounts, WC apologists would--justifiably--view those accounts as powerful evidence. But, since the HSCA and ARRB interviews reveal the opposite--that the back wound was shallow and had no exit point--WC apologists must, at least publicly, lamely dismiss them as "mistaken."
